Superseding Agreement Now Governs Zapruder Film Access — and Locks Away the Best Copies

Javitch Law Office is counsel for the Forum on Open Access to Government Records in the Zapruder film litigation.
Attorney Advertising | Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome

On October 1, 2026, the Archivist of the United States signed a new agreement with the private foundation that operates the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza governing the National Archives' Zapruder film holdings. Read the full license agreement (PDF).

Read the Museum–National Archives License Agreement (PDF, effective October 1, 2026)

The agreement is sweeping in its scope. It states that it supersedes all previous agreements in the 63-year-old relationship between the film's copyright holder and the National Archives. It purports to assert the Museum's copyright over any and all versions of the Zapruder film held by the National Archives, which could cover dozens or hundreds of items. The agreement grants permission for the National Archives to post the film online, but the agreement also locks away the most important versions of the film that were supposed to be made for the public.

The Museum's grant is empty

The Museum's permission to post the film online is presented as a concession, but posting the film online would merely bring NARA into compliance with existing law, not grant any rights to the Museum. Since the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, the National Archives has been required to make available online frequently requested records. The Zapruder film, among the most frequently requested records in the National Archives, falls squarely within that provision. The duty reaches all of the versions NARA holds, and it does not depend on the Museum's permission.

The Forum on Open Access to Government Records sued NARA to enforce that duty. The court denied NARA's motion to dismiss the claim on August 5, 2026. Eight weeks later, NARA and the Museum signed this agreement.

Even so, permission is not performance. As of this writing, NARA has not posted the film online. And in its court filings, NARA continues to argue that it is not required to do so.

The agreement restricts the highest-resolution versions meant for the public

The agreement's real work is that it purports to require the Museum's permission to access the highest-resolution versions. The high-quality versions of the Zapruder film were created nearly 25 years ago, in 2002. Under a National Archives contract, Monaco Laboratories in San Francisco produced them. Its March 28, 2002 report to NARA describes the duplication of the camera original and the two Secret Service first-generation copies into 35mm blow-up preservation elements and release prints.

The failure to realize the goals of the ARRB's 1997 Zapruder policy

On April 24, 1997, the Assassination Records Review Board, the federal body Congress created to gather and release the assassination records, resolved "that the Review Board will do all in its power to ensure that the best available copy of the Zapruder film shall become available to the public at the lowest reasonable price." The Board also offered to work with the Zapruder family's company "to establish a base reference for the film through digitization." Announcing the vote, Board Chairman Judge John R. Tunheim (now a Senior United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota) said: "The members of the Review Board believe it is important that the public have free and unfettered access to this film at a reasonable cost."

The goals of the 1997 statement of policy entirely failed. In 1999, a panel of arbitrators decided that the United States should pay $16 million to acquire the original film. Inexplicably, the $16 million did not include the copyright, which was then purportedly transferred to the Sixth Floor Museum.

In contrast to the ARRB's statement, the high-resolution versions were never released to the public as the best available copy "at the lowest reasonable price." They remain expensive, and they require the Museum's permission. A researcher who purchased a high-resolution copy from NARA in 2008 had to obtain the Museum's permission and pay several hundred dollars to do so.

The new agreement is the final nail in the coffin of the ARRB's goals. It does not open those records to the public. The Archivist of the United States signed this agreement to keep them closed. The license NARA has covers only "a digital non-commercial grade copy," which a footnote says NARA calls "reference copies." The agreement never defines "non-commercial grade": not the resolution, not the format, not the generation of the copy. Everything above it, which the Museum calls "commercial-grade," remains off-limits without the Museum's permission.

The result is that the versions the government made so the public could study the film are the versions the agreement places beyond the public's reach.

Why isn't the public allowed to see the highest-resolution versions?

The premise of the agreement is alarming: that there is something in the higher-resolution versions of the Zapruder film the public is not permitted to see. What could be in these high-resolution versions that the Museum seeks to continue to control? The detail those versions preserve is exactly what researchers need to study what the film shows.

The answer to this issue has already been decided in favor of the public's right to access information and is on settled ground. In a 1968 decision, a federal court described the Zapruder film as "an historic document and undoubtedly the most important photographic evidence concerning the fatal shots." Time Inc. v. Bernard Geis Assocs., 293 F. Supp. 130, 131 (S.D.N.Y. 1968).

The case arose because a researcher wanted to see the copyright holder's film and frames "in the hope that these would be clearer than those in the Archives." Id. at 135. The court held that his publication of the frames was a fair use, explaining: "There is a public interest in having the fullest information available on the murder of President Kennedy." Id. at 146. Restricting certain quality versions of the film that could give people more information about American history would violate the principles of copyright which are "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 8. No court has criticized this historic decision, but the government simply ignores it and operates as if this opinion had never been written.

Fifty-eight years later, the copyright holder has a contract with the federal government that guarantees the opposite: a version of the film good enough to watch, and a better version only the Museum may release.

New restrictions not justified by FOIA or copyright law

The agreement also imposes conditions on use that have no basis in FOIA or copyright law, the statutes that actually govern.

Research purposes only. The license limits access to "research purposes only" and requires NARA to tell viewers they are responsible for "obtaining any necessary permission for use, further duplication, and publication of the Zapruder Film, in whole or in part, from the Museum."

Content restrictions. For the first time, the license imposes explicit limits on how the film may be presented. NARA must promise not to use the film, or encourage others to use it, "in a manner which is sensational," and not to "punctuate or emphasize the episodes of violence" in the film, particularly the depiction of the fatal shot, except for "historic or scientific inquiry, illustration, or study." No earlier written instrument bound the federal government to editorial limits on how it presents this record.

Copyright notice on government webpages. Section 4 requires NARA to place a Museum copyright notice "adjacent to any instance in which the entire Zapruder Film is being made viewable," including in "NARA's Electronic FOIA Reading Room." The notice reads: "Abraham Zapruder Film © 1967 (Renewed 1995) The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza." However, the film was shot in 1963.

Private control over public records

The agreement offers the public a right it already had and takes away access to the versions of the film the government made for it. An agreement between the government and a private party that restricts public access to 63-year-old records of a presidential assassination, on the strength of a disputed copyright, deserves close public scrutiny.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the October 1, 2026 Zapruder film agreement?

A non-exclusive copyright license agreement between the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza and the National Archives, signed by the Archivist of the United States. It supersedes all prior agreements governing NARA's Zapruder film holdings and asserts the Museum's copyright over every version of the film NARA holds. Read the full agreement (PDF).

Does the agreement let the public watch the Zapruder film online?

It permits NARA to post a "digital non-commercial grade copy" online — but NARA was already required by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 to post frequently requested records online, and as of this writing it still has not done so. The higher-resolution versions remain restricted.

What versions of the Zapruder film does the agreement keep restricted?

Everything the Museum calls "commercial-grade" — including the high-resolution 35mm preservation elements and release prints Monaco Laboratories produced under a NARA contract in 2002 — requires the Museum's permission to access. The agreement never defines what "non-commercial grade" means.

Did the government pay for the Zapruder film?

Yes. In 1999, arbitrators awarded the Zapruder family $16 million for the original film under the JFK Records Act — but the payment did not include the copyright, which the family donated to the Sixth Floor Museum.

What is the status of the lawsuit over the Zapruder film?

On August 5, 2026, Judge Jane J. Boyle of the Northern District of Texas denied NARA's motion to dismiss and allowed four claims to proceed, including a FOIA claim to compel online publication. Read the case study or read the court's order (PDF).